Remote-hands and field engineers
OEM technicians, often at night, often once

In this sector the access record is not an admin artefact. It is part of what you are selling. Cage- and rack-level control, escorted visitors and tamper-evident logs.
Your customers audit you, and access is what they audit
OEM technicians, often at night, often once
Escorted, ticket-driven, per hall or per cage
Long build-out phases inside a live facility
On behalf of your customers
Customer contracts · information security standards

A prospect asks how you control access to their hall. Today the honest answer is a process document. It should be a screen you can turn around and show them.
Data Centres
Your largest tenant is being examined by their own regulator and needs 12 months of physical access evidence for their hall.
12 months, one hall, every person who entered. With the reason and the approval behind each visit.
The history is already in the platform because it was recorded as it happened, per person and per zone.
The work order or ticket that justified the access is attached to the grant, and therefore is the approver.
The report exports in a form the tenant can put straight into their own evidence pack.
Yes. Zones are modelled in the governing layer, instead of being inherited from how the access control system happens to group doors. A grant can be scoped to a single cage even where the underlying system groups at hall level.
In minutes, and without a data project. The history is recorded as it happens, per person and per zone, with the approver and the reason attached to each grant. Producing the report means filtering a record that already exists.
It can. Access requests can require a reason. A ticket, a work order or a named approval. That reference stays attached to the grant in the evidence record.
You judge something that runs on your own site. Your access systems and readers stay where they are. If it earns its place, we extend it site by site.
One siteOne populationYour readers stay